31 thoughts on “Roku finally lands YouTube! But just one model.”
Wow. Finally!
Now all I need is that elusive FIOS app.
The Verizon PR woman is really tired of hearing from me… :)
Ah there it is.
BTW, a FiOS app would be great. But if it’s anything like the Samsung Smart TV app that Verizon made, no thanks.
Oh, and only on Roku 3. Not 2 XS, XD, etc. Oh well. We have a 2 XS.
A Fios app? I have no interest in any app that can only play live TV. What’s the point?
We still watch live TV, especially when multitasking. A Roku box in the kitchen or basement office beats a humongo set-top with fees (and the kitchen doesn’t have a coax jack, anyhow). If a TiVo Mini with Lifetime was something less than the current $250, I’d own more…
First thoughts on the YouTube app:
I had to force a firmware upgrade on my Roku 3 before the app was visible in the channel store. Installation of the app was easy. The on screen search function is tedious to use, because instead of using the normal grid to select characters it displays them all in one horizontal row. But video quality seems good.
However, the best part was when I learned that I could link the app to my iPad, and then use the YouTube iPad app to select videos and then beam them to the Roku to watch. The iPad user interface is a bit clumsy, but vastly superior to that of the Roku app. Based on the quality of the video. It’s pretty obvious that the video is streaming directly to the Roku and not passing through the iPad.
Overall, the Roku experience coupled with the iPad as a second UI is pretty good. I have been waiting for this app for a long time, and am very satisfied so far (keeping fingers crossed).
A sort of hidden headline in all of this is that the Roku is using DIAL, the protocol used by the Chromecast in order to provide the “send to” feature. If Roku develops DIAL further to mirror web pages in a fashion similar to the Chromecast and things could get very interesting.
The smartphone control of YouTube is probably more Google than Roku… most or all of their recent apps have included those hooks and the link isn’t Roku app to YouTube, it’s YouTube app to YouTube (via a numeric registration/PIN). We know Roku has been looking at Miracast (via a relationship with Broadcom)…
Will be interesting to see what additional boxes they’ll be supporting next year…
It is youtube app to youtube channel, but note that it works even at the roku home page, without the youtube channel open. You hit “play on roku” in the youtube app and it starts up on the roku. Netflix works the exact same way.
Dave,
I guess there are some people that still watch non-sports/live competition or news live. What the Fios app should have is the same access to the the on demand library that a regular set top box has. That might actually make the app compelling especially as I don’t have a Fios set top box in my house with which I can access on demand. As of now, I haven’t even bothered to download the app to my ipad or iphone. If I really want to watch something live in the house it would be much easier to use the Tivo app and that would also give me the live buffer.
Rodalpho, good to know – either I forgot or didn’t know.
Daniel, On Demand is probably a reasonable expectation and it’s something some of the others offer via apps. And a single Verizon entry point beats logging into countless channel-specific apps.
I’m going to bet the restriction of YouTube to the Roku 3 is on purpose, to goose sales during the Christmas season. But whatever, I guess we’ll see it on the older models eventually.
But if Chromecast gets a few more channels first, I’ll be dumping my Roku…
The youtube channel is not particularly fast, even on the roku3. It’s acceptable, but not speedy. It’s clearly google’s full-on HTML5 UI.
I betcha it wouldn’t run well on a roku2.
But when you say Roku 2, you probably mean something other than the 2013 Roku 2. (Yeah, they need a better naming system.) I assume the 2013 Roku 2 is getting it… and their linked blog post indicates models – plural.
Well not really, no. The SoC in the roku3 is reportedly 5x as fast as every other model.
They plan to bring the new netflix and youtube channels (both of which are html5-based, not using the roku API) to older rokus, but my guess is those will have to be optimized for speed somehow.
As a Roku 2 owner, what Rodalpho said.
Rodalpho, that 5x statement was made before the 2013 Roku 2 in new, sculpted enclosure arrived. Haven’t been paying attention, don’t know if it’s the same guts as the prior gen or the same chip as the Roku 3. Both the 2013 R2 and the R3 have dualband WiFi – not sure if that’s an indicator, if processor and wireless are bundled in this product. Not that it helps you or Chucky if you’ve got the prior gen… or maybe it’ll be there, just slow.
The new Roku models released this September all use the exact same cpu (BCMÂ2835 600 MHz) as the original Roku 2s. :( So Roku 3 is the only way to go or Apple TV.
Yep, the roku3 remains 5x faster than every other model. It’s also twice as expensive as most of them, but you get what you pay for there.
I have two roku3s and are very happy with them. The time warner channel now does in demand too, which is nice as I have a TiVo.
.[…]roku3 remains 5x faster than every other model. It’s also twice as expensive as most of them, but you get what you pay for there.
The Roku 3 is $89 so unless someone is unemployed I can’t see money being a deciding factor. Roku 3 is the only model with “YouTube and updated Netflix(Both with DIAL support)” as per the website. :)
I’m not a big fan of buying yesterday’s technology today. I would never buy an iPad 2 for the same reason. $100 less than iPad Air yet 3 generations behind and almost obsolete.
I completely agree, but I don’t assume everybody’s price tolerance is the same as mine. Fifty bucks is a lot of money to some people.
The 2013 Roku 2 and LT are marketed as new models in a new enclosure… not all will probably realize there’s a difference in content. I’ve been recommending the 2013 Roku 2 due to the dual band and headphone remote, figuring most wouldn’t appreciate the gaming remote, Ethernet, or USB. But given the processor situation and the divergent content, I guess it’s Roku 3 recommendations from here on out. (I own a Roku 3.)
Yeah, if their marketing rebrand fooled _you_, it probably fooled quite a few people.
@Rodalpho Understand Roku 2 requires recurring service fees to use Netflix ($96/yr), HuluPlus ($96/yr), Amazon ($80)/yr or HBOGo ($192/yr). $50 doesn’t seem like much then. But I guess if you want to put a Roku on every TV in the house including basement and garage $89 a pop adds up. It’s just the Roku 3 is such a pleasure to use once you’ve gotten use to a Roku 2 or Premiere. :)
@Dave the new LT did get a 50% CPU speed bump from 400 MHz to 600 MHz. I had no idea the LT was slower than the other models.
Hey Spotify is now free like Pandora.
@Bryan: Sure, but most people share those accounts. I subscribe to netflix and amazon, and my friend gives me his HBO Go login. That’s super common.
Spotify radio is free like pandora, real spotify with collections and playlists isn’t.
[Netflix, HuluPlus, Amazon or HBOGo] but most people share those accounts. I subscribe to netflix and amazon, and my friend gives me his HBO Go login. That’s super common.
It’s might be common amongst college and early twenty somethings but no longer of that amazing age I’ve no idea if, like Napster once was, this is the new entitlement. But most people are honest and realize stealing is not ethical and being cheap is not an excuse. None of my friends share accounts nor do I know anyone who does. Of course my friends and I have good careers and have lived through Napster and the collapse of the music industry. Who knew at the time Metallica was right?!
Now I get if you’re a college student getting by drinking PBR and can’t afford HBO or you’re unemployed. Sorry this is not aimed at anyone as I know in a recent article the author talks about account sharing so oblivious that he himself admits to doing it!
As one who has a good portion of his life savings in Netflix stock it’s obvious how important each customer is. Netflix makes a small profit with billions in content obligations. Hulu until this quarter was losing money. Amazon Video is a loss leader. HBO is the lone profitable one due to cable subscribers.
Forgot to include this pix of Netflix profile sharing :)
Who knew Metallica was right? No, I think South Park got it right, if I may quote:
“Briitney (Spears) used to have a Gulfstream IV. Now she’s had to sell it and get a Gulfstream III because people like you chose to download her music for free. The Gulfstream III doesn’t even have a remote control for its surround-sound DVD system. Still think downloading music for free is no big deal?”
Music artists don’t make money from selling songs anyway, the money comes from touring. Just keep making it rain on those music companies Bryan, it’s the American way right?
That episode is from 2003 and it’s common knowledge that stealing music destroyed the music industry. So while super-stars like Britney and boy-bands continued to do fine the result was the next Led Zeppelin wasn’t signed because music companies didn’t have the money to lose on new talent.
What saved the music industry? ITunes. Getting people to start paying for music again especially twenty-somethings who went through college during the Napster years.
The idea that money from songs doesn’t make artists money is bullsh*t. I read in article a few years back that Rihanna couldn’t even go on a tour herself because she wasn’t a big enough star to pull audiences in. At best she’d have to team up for a few artists to tour! Now do you honestly think a no name band with one album is going on a big money making tour?
Stop watching Fox news and read. Try the NY Times, the Washing Post, the WSJ.
Wow. Finally!
Now all I need is that elusive FIOS app.
The Verizon PR woman is really tired of hearing from me… :)
Ah there it is.
BTW, a FiOS app would be great. But if it’s anything like the Samsung Smart TV app that Verizon made, no thanks.
Oh, and only on Roku 3. Not 2 XS, XD, etc. Oh well. We have a 2 XS.
A Fios app? I have no interest in any app that can only play live TV. What’s the point?
We still watch live TV, especially when multitasking. A Roku box in the kitchen or basement office beats a humongo set-top with fees (and the kitchen doesn’t have a coax jack, anyhow). If a TiVo Mini with Lifetime was something less than the current $250, I’d own more…
First thoughts on the YouTube app:
I had to force a firmware upgrade on my Roku 3 before the app was visible in the channel store. Installation of the app was easy. The on screen search function is tedious to use, because instead of using the normal grid to select characters it displays them all in one horizontal row. But video quality seems good.
However, the best part was when I learned that I could link the app to my iPad, and then use the YouTube iPad app to select videos and then beam them to the Roku to watch. The iPad user interface is a bit clumsy, but vastly superior to that of the Roku app. Based on the quality of the video. It’s pretty obvious that the video is streaming directly to the Roku and not passing through the iPad.
Overall, the Roku experience coupled with the iPad as a second UI is pretty good. I have been waiting for this app for a long time, and am very satisfied so far (keeping fingers crossed).
A sort of hidden headline in all of this is that the Roku is using DIAL, the protocol used by the Chromecast in order to provide the “send to” feature. If Roku develops DIAL further to mirror web pages in a fashion similar to the Chromecast and things could get very interesting.
The smartphone control of YouTube is probably more Google than Roku… most or all of their recent apps have included those hooks and the link isn’t Roku app to YouTube, it’s YouTube app to YouTube (via a numeric registration/PIN). We know Roku has been looking at Miracast (via a relationship with Broadcom)…
To mirror dwgsp, first impressions are positive – firmware updated then app installed.
Will be interesting to see what additional boxes they’ll be supporting next year…
It is youtube app to youtube channel, but note that it works even at the roku home page, without the youtube channel open. You hit “play on roku” in the youtube app and it starts up on the roku. Netflix works the exact same way.
Dave,
I guess there are some people that still watch non-sports/live competition or news live. What the Fios app should have is the same access to the the on demand library that a regular set top box has. That might actually make the app compelling especially as I don’t have a Fios set top box in my house with which I can access on demand. As of now, I haven’t even bothered to download the app to my ipad or iphone. If I really want to watch something live in the house it would be much easier to use the Tivo app and that would also give me the live buffer.
Rodalpho, good to know – either I forgot or didn’t know.
Daniel, On Demand is probably a reasonable expectation and it’s something some of the others offer via apps. And a single Verizon entry point beats logging into countless channel-specific apps.
I’m going to bet the restriction of YouTube to the Roku 3 is on purpose, to goose sales during the Christmas season. But whatever, I guess we’ll see it on the older models eventually.
But if Chromecast gets a few more channels first, I’ll be dumping my Roku…
The youtube channel is not particularly fast, even on the roku3. It’s acceptable, but not speedy. It’s clearly google’s full-on HTML5 UI.
I betcha it wouldn’t run well on a roku2.
But when you say Roku 2, you probably mean something other than the 2013 Roku 2. (Yeah, they need a better naming system.) I assume the 2013 Roku 2 is getting it… and their linked blog post indicates models – plural.
Well not really, no. The SoC in the roku3 is reportedly 5x as fast as every other model.
They plan to bring the new netflix and youtube channels (both of which are html5-based, not using the roku API) to older rokus, but my guess is those will have to be optimized for speed somehow.
As a Roku 2 owner, what Rodalpho said.
Rodalpho, that 5x statement was made before the 2013 Roku 2 in new, sculpted enclosure arrived. Haven’t been paying attention, don’t know if it’s the same guts as the prior gen or the same chip as the Roku 3. Both the 2013 R2 and the R3 have dualband WiFi – not sure if that’s an indicator, if processor and wireless are bundled in this product. Not that it helps you or Chucky if you’ve got the prior gen… or maybe it’ll be there, just slow.
The new Roku models released this September all use the exact same cpu (BCMÂ2835 600 MHz) as the original Roku 2s. :( So Roku 3 is the only way to go or Apple TV.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roku#Third_generation
Yep, the roku3 remains 5x faster than every other model. It’s also twice as expensive as most of them, but you get what you pay for there.
I have two roku3s and are very happy with them. The time warner channel now does in demand too, which is nice as I have a TiVo.
The Roku 3 is $89 so unless someone is unemployed I can’t see money being a deciding factor. Roku 3 is the only model with “YouTube and updated Netflix(Both with DIAL support)” as per the website. :)
I’m not a big fan of buying yesterday’s technology today. I would never buy an iPad 2 for the same reason. $100 less than iPad Air yet 3 generations behind and almost obsolete.
I completely agree, but I don’t assume everybody’s price tolerance is the same as mine. Fifty bucks is a lot of money to some people.
The 2013 Roku 2 and LT are marketed as new models in a new enclosure… not all will probably realize there’s a difference in content. I’ve been recommending the 2013 Roku 2 due to the dual band and headphone remote, figuring most wouldn’t appreciate the gaming remote, Ethernet, or USB. But given the processor situation and the divergent content, I guess it’s Roku 3 recommendations from here on out. (I own a Roku 3.)
Yeah, if their marketing rebrand fooled _you_, it probably fooled quite a few people.
@Rodalpho Understand Roku 2 requires recurring service fees to use Netflix ($96/yr), HuluPlus ($96/yr), Amazon ($80)/yr or HBOGo ($192/yr). $50 doesn’t seem like much then. But I guess if you want to put a Roku on every TV in the house including basement and garage $89 a pop adds up. It’s just the Roku 3 is such a pleasure to use once you’ve gotten use to a Roku 2 or Premiere. :)
@Dave the new LT did get a 50% CPU speed bump from 400 MHz to 600 MHz. I had no idea the LT was slower than the other models.
Hey Spotify is now free like Pandora.
@Bryan: Sure, but most people share those accounts. I subscribe to netflix and amazon, and my friend gives me his HBO Go login. That’s super common.
Spotify radio is free like pandora, real spotify with collections and playlists isn’t.
It’s might be common amongst college and early twenty somethings but no longer of that amazing age I’ve no idea if, like Napster once was, this is the new entitlement. But most people are honest and realize stealing is not ethical and being cheap is not an excuse. None of my friends share accounts nor do I know anyone who does. Of course my friends and I have good careers and have lived through Napster and the collapse of the music industry. Who knew at the time Metallica was right?!
Now I get if you’re a college student getting by drinking PBR and can’t afford HBO or you’re unemployed. Sorry this is not aimed at anyone as I know in a recent article the author talks about account sharing so oblivious that he himself admits to doing it!
As one who has a good portion of his life savings in Netflix stock it’s obvious how important each customer is. Netflix makes a small profit with billions in content obligations. Hulu until this quarter was losing money. Amazon Video is a loss leader. HBO is the lone profitable one due to cable subscribers.
Forgot to include this pix of Netflix profile sharing :)
http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/2013-12/enhanced/webdr03/15/16/enhanced-buzz-16776-1387142545-29.jpg
Who knew Metallica was right? No, I think South Park got it right, if I may quote:
“Briitney (Spears) used to have a Gulfstream IV. Now she’s had to sell it and get a Gulfstream III because people like you chose to download her music for free. The Gulfstream III doesn’t even have a remote control for its surround-sound DVD system. Still think downloading music for free is no big deal?”
Music artists don’t make money from selling songs anyway, the money comes from touring. Just keep making it rain on those music companies Bryan, it’s the American way right?
That episode is from 2003 and it’s common knowledge that stealing music destroyed the music industry. So while super-stars like Britney and boy-bands continued to do fine the result was the next Led Zeppelin wasn’t signed because music companies didn’t have the money to lose on new talent.
What saved the music industry? ITunes. Getting people to start paying for music again especially twenty-somethings who went through college during the Napster years.
The idea that money from songs doesn’t make artists money is bullsh*t. I read in article a few years back that Rihanna couldn’t even go on a tour herself because she wasn’t a big enough star to pull audiences in. At best she’d have to team up for a few artists to tour! Now do you honestly think a no name band with one album is going on a big money making tour?
Stop watching Fox news and read. Try the NY Times, the Washing Post, the WSJ.